JUAN GONZALEZ: In Venezuela, tens of thousands of protesters marched through the capital city of Caracas Thursday to oppose a series of constitutional changes proposed by President Hugo Chavez.The referendum is coming to a vote on Sunday. Chavez plans to lead rallies in favor of the reforms today. Venezuelans will vote on sixty-nine proposed changes to the nation's constitution that include eliminating presidential term limits, creating forms of communal property and cutting the workday from eight hours to six.Thursday's demonstration was the biggest show of opposition to the constitutional overhauls so far. On Wednesday, hundreds of students clashed with police and the Venezuelan national guard. Most surveys say the outcome of the December 2nd vote is too close to call.AMY GOODMAN: This week, President Chavez claimed the US government is fomenting unrest to challenge the referendum. His foreign minister went on television late Wednesday revealing what he said was a CIA plan to secure a "no" victory. The confidential memo was reportedly sent from the US embassy in Caracas and addressed to the director of Central Intelligence, Michael Hayden.James Petras is a former professor of sociology and Latin American studies at Binghamton University. He is author of a number of books, including Social Movements and State Power. His exclusive article in "Counterpunch" is called "CIA Venezuela Destabilization Memo Surfaces." Professor Petras joins us now from Binghamton, New York.Welcome, Professor Petras. Can you start off by talking about what exactly this memo is? Have you actually seen it? What is it reported to say?JAMES PETRAS: Well, I picked it up off the Venezuelan government program. It describes in some detail what the strategy of the US embassy has been, and most likely the author, Michael Middleton Steere, who’s listed as US embassy, may be a CIA operative, because he sends the report to Michael Hayden, the director of the CIA.Now, what the memo talks about essentially is, first of all, the effectiveness of their campaign against the constitutional amendments, and it concedes that the amendment will be approved, but it does mention the fact that they’ve reduced the margin of victory by six percentage points. The second part is more interesting. It actually mentions the fact that the US strategy is what they call a "pincer operation." That’s the name of the document itself. It's--"pincer" is "tenaza," and it's, first of all, to try to undermine the electoral process, the vote itself, and then secondly, once the vote goes through, if they are not able to stop the vote, is to engage in a massive campaign calling fraud and rejecting the outcome that comes from the election. So, on one hand, they're calling a no vote, and on the other hand, they’re denouncing the outcome if they lose.Now, the other part that’s interesting about this document is what it outlines as the immediate tasks in the last phase. And that includes getting people out in the street, particularly the students. And interestingly enough, there is a mixture here of extreme rightists and some social democrats and even some ex-Maoists and Trotskyists. They mention the Red Flag, Bandera Roja, and praise them actually for their street-fighting ability and causing attacks on public institutions like the electoral tribunal.But more interestingly is their efforts to intensify their contacts with military offices. And what they seem to have on their agenda is to try to seize either a territorial base or an institutional base around which to rally discontented citizens and call on the military--and it particularly mentions the National Guard--to rally in overthrowing the referendum outcome and the government. So this does include a section on a military uprising.And it complains about the fact that the groups under its umbrella or its partners are not all unified on this strategy, and some have abandoned the umbrella operation and, secondly, that the government intelligence has discovered some of their storage warehouses of armaments and have even picked up some of their operatives. And they hope in this that this is not going to upset their plans.JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, James Petras, this is obviously a very explosive memo, coming just a few days before the actual referendum. And while it certainly sounds like many of the types of tactics that the CIA has used in prior international adventures, has there been any confirmation whether this memo is--JAMES PETRAS: Well, obviously, it's a memo that the US will denounce. They always have this clause in their operation that they should be able to have an out.Secondly, the Venezuelans are very tolerant of their opposition. The Chavez government has not expelled the operative here, Michael Middleton Steere. There have been discussions, I’ve gotten from my sources in Venezuela, in the foreign office to expel this official, but they haven’t actually taken that step. And it goes along with this very libertarian outlook in Venezuelan government. You know, many of the people involved in the overthrow of the president, the military takeover for forty-eight hours in 2002, many of them never were put on trial and never were arrested, and they’re back in action in this referendum. So law enforcement regarding what would normally be called insurrectionary activity in the United States--many of these people would have been locked in Fort Leavenworth and the key thrown away--in Venezuela, the golpistas, the people involved in coup planning and operations, are having a second, third chance.

There was some stuff I wanted to talk about tonight and even mentioned it yesterday. But I saw Nii OkaiJah's "Is Africa the Next Cold War Theater?" and thought since this was a topic we've touched on a few times lately that this really needed to be highlighted:

When Ghana became the first Black country south of the Sahara to gain freedom from colonial rule on March 6, 1957, its founder, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, set Africa on a course toward continental liberation and unification. Assisted later by the defunct Organization of African Unity, all African countries attained political independence, but they were not completely united. Although the later formation of the African Union (AU) was seen as a step in that direction, the AU soon lost steam because of the failure of African leaders to come out courageously in establishing the United States of Africa at its summit in Accra, Ghana this year. This is perpetuating the weak political and economic conditions of more than 50 countries on the continent. Consequently, Africa continues to be placed in a weak position, at the mercy of foreign countries with economic and military strength. Such is the impact of the Chinese economic drive, and most recently the U.S. creation of the Africa Command (Africom).According to U.S. officials, Africom is aimed at better coordinating and cohesive handling of the work of three different command centers, all of them based outside Africa. The new force, with an initial 300 employees, is temporarily based in Germany while the debate is waged whether it should be sited on the continent or not. So far, strife-torn Liberia is the only African country to have agreed to have the headquarters in that country.Opposition is strong in Africa because much as Africans are economically poor, they cherish their political independence, and see any military program without their approval in the way of planning a conquest. A grim reminder of this was echoed in a recent article in the Chicago Defender, a leading African American newspaper. Writing under the headline, "Conquest and greed: That's what made America great," Harry Alford, president of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, stated, "The slavery, genocide and empire building got America off to a good start - free land and free labor. You can't lose with that... Free land and massive infusion of cheap labor later made it easy for the United States to be ready and take advantage of the Industrial Revolution." He continued, "We [Americans] were well prepared from it. It made us a military and industrial might during the 20th century," [and beyond].Today, Americans' greatest need is energy to maintain their power and high lifestyles. With consumption of energy so high, dependence is on foreign sources. Until recently, the Middle East led the world in meeting this need by providing 20 percent of U.S. oil imports. However, according to recent reports from the U.S. Energy Administration, African countries now provide the U.S. with 24 percent of its oil needs. In addition, Africa provides the U.S. with substantial amounts of strategic minerals and raw materials for American industries.

The US is pulling up bases in Europe and hoping to plant a lot more in Africa. This isn't about 'helping' anymore than Our Modern Day Carrie Nations want to "Save Darfur." It's about occupying and controlling Africa. You have to wonder how this imperialistic phase in the United States has gone unchecked for so long? We replaced England with empire building (France dabbled it in as well) and you'd think the other countries would grasp that if it goes unchecked, sooner or later the US is going to put them on the list. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the US government made a move on Canada. (Although with Stephen Harper willing to hand over everything, why would Bully Boy need more from Canada?)

If you live in the US what should really scare you is that empire's fall. At some point, the US will fall. It will need help from others and who's going to be around to help? Be willing? More importantly, with the way we've invaded and destroyed, you have to wonder if a lot of grudges held might suddenly get paid off. Danny Schechter writes a lot about our economy, not just the housing crisis but the economy as well, and if you follow him, you realize we're just digging an ever deeper hole. Maybe it won't be in my lifetime, but at some point those bills are coming due and it's not going to be pretty when that happens.

In the meantime, think about all that we are denied as citizens (in war or 'peace') with the monies wasted on stirring on sh*t in the rest of the world whether by directly going to war, covertly going to war, staging coups, spying, etc.

Now Africa's rises on the list (it's been on it for some time, obviously, but now it's a place to really occupy). And we've got all these "OMG!" headlines about a teacher in Sudan. You know what, you go to teach somewhere, learn the culture. Boo-hoo. Of course, she may have known the culture and may just be attempting to build an international incident. I don't have sympathy for people who go into targeted areas and do their own screw ups that could change the status from "targeted" to "declared" war. You went there, you screwed up. They've got their own legal system. That's how it works in a foreign country. There are things you could do in this country as a vistor that would get you sentenced that might not in other countries. And since we continue to have the death penalty, we're not a lot different from some of the 'extreme' countries. And, face it, you don't even have to be guilty to end up on death row as one DNA test after another has been revealing.

Think how sick that is. And think about how sick it is that with people on death row, the government won't pony up the money for universal DNA testing. We have a prison-industrial society and I'm sure DNA testing could prove many people not on death row were innocent as well. I'm not claiming that wouldn't happen. But I'm saying that even in the most extreme cases, where you are willing to put someone to death, you're not willing to pay for a DNA test. The government should. Defense teams shouldn't have to get the money or beg a governor. That should be a basic as long as the death penalty is in effect. (I favor abolishing the death penalty.) I don't see how anyone who favors the death penalty can't also argue for universal DNA testing for death row prisoners. I really don't because this is life or death and you'd think people would want to be damn sure before they went further. How do you apologize after someone's been put to death. "Woops!"?

U.S. war veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan have announced they're planning to descend on Washington, DC this March to testify about war crimes they committed or personally witnessed in Iraq."The war in Iraq is not covered to its potential because of how dangerous it is for reporters to cover it," said Liam Madden, a former Marine and member of the group Iraq Veterans Against the War. "That's left a lot of misconceptions in the minds of the American public about what the true nature of military occupation looks like."Iraq Veterans Against the War argues that well-publicized incidents of American brutality like the Abu Ghraib prison scandal and the massacre of an entire family of Iraqis in the town of Haditha are not the isolated incidents perpetrated by "a few bad apples," as many politicians and military leaders have claimed. They are part of a pattern, the group says, of "an increasingly bloody occupation.""This is our generation getting to tell history," Madden told OneWorld, "to ensure that the actual history gets told -- that it's not a sugar-coated, diluted version of what actually happened."Iraq Veterans Against the War is calling the gathering a "Winter Soldier," named after a similar event organized by Vietnam veterans in 1971.In 1971, over 100 members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions.

IVAW's event is major. I hope you're telling everyone you know about it. If we all know it's coming, it's going to make it more difficult for the press to get away with ignoring it. This needs big coverage and we can all do our part by getting the word out.

That's it for me. It's late and I'm tired. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, November 30, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, a mass kidnapping is reported, the peace movement is not election central (get the message out), and more.

Last Saturday, Lawrence Hill (Ottawa Citizen) reminded (1) "the Anglo-American attack on Iraq in 2003 was an offensive -- not a retaliatory -- strike. The war had no approval from the UN Security Council, and for this reason Canada's prime minister of the day, Jean Chretien, refused to support it. In 2004, then-UN secretary general Kofi Annan declared explicilty that the U.S.-led war on Iraq was illegal" and (2) "according to official UN policy, soldiers who are likely to be punished for having deserted military action 'condemned by the international legal community as contrary to rules of human conduct' should be eligible for refugee status." Hill is co-author with Joshua Key of the book The Deserter's Tale and the refusal of Canada's Supreme Court to hear the appeals of US war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey makes it necessary to review those basics. Nikolai Lanine (Rabble News) observes, "We did betray them, after all. As a veteran of an illegal war, I feared Canada would do this. But I'd hoped otherwise." Lanine goes on to note that it wasn't just US war resisters during Vietnam being granted asylum, "November 26, 1986, the Legislative Assembly of Ontario welcomed five Soviet war objectors from Afghanistan. The Assembly described them as 'heroic individuals' and 'conscientious objectors in refusing to be partners in crime.'"

Support actual war resisters in Canada by sending them expense money. From my friend Ryan (I gave him and his wife money to get to Canada over two years ago):

In light of the recent Supreme Court denial in Canada, I (Ryan Johnson), My wife (Jen Johnson) and Brandon Hughey need help raising funds to travel to Ottawa to attend hearings before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, where War Resisters will be giving Testimony to the committee. At these hearings the committee will be deciding on whether or not to make a provision to allow war resisters to stay in Canada. This is one of our last chances to be able to continue living in Canada. We will be leaving December 7th because the hearings are December 11th, 2007 so we need to act fast. They may try to send guys back soon and we need to have a strong War Resister Presence. We appreciate all of the support and Want to thank all of you who can help.

Checks/money orders can be sent for Ryan, Jen and Brandon to:312 Tower Rd Nelson, BC V1L3K6

If you are in Canada, you can utilize the contact info at War Resisters Support Campaign to let members of the Canadian Parliament know you support legislation allowing war resisters to stay in Canada. If you are in the United States (or elsewhere), you can utilize the contact info and/or forum at Courage to Resist. Public outcry didn't stop the illegal war from starting and public opposition has yet to end it. War resisters in Canada who have gone public are putting a great deal on the line. Use the links to show your support for them.

The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

"The war in Iraq is not covered to its potential because of how dangerous it is for reporters to cover it. That's left a lot of misconceptions in the minds of the American public about what the true nature of military occupation looks like," declares IVAW's Liam Madden to Aaron Glantz in Glantz' report on the upcoming Winter Soldiers Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation (OneWorld). Madden is correct and only more so this week as a result of Project for Excellence in Journalism's report (PDF format here, our summary Wendesday here). This survey of 111 US journalists (mainstream media) who have covered Iraq found that "they do not believe the coverage of Iraq over time has been too negative. If anything, many believe the sitatuion over the course of the war has been worse than the American public has perceived, according to a new survey of journalists covering the war from Iraq." The report also found that 63% of the respondents stated "that Iraqi staffers do all or most of the street reporting outside the Green Zone." Madden tells Glantz, "This is our generation getting to tell history to ensure that the actual history gets told -- that it's not a sugar-coated, diluted version of what actually happened."

Turning to Iraq. Yesterday's snapshot included this: "Reuters reports 2 car bombs were found ('and detonated') 'in the Baghdad office complex of the leader of the country's main Sunni Arab bloc' -- Adnan al-Dulaimi." Waleed Ibrahim and Alaa Shahine (Reuters) reported this morning on the arrests of "dozens of people, including the son of a leading Sunni Arab politicians" with 7 arrested at al-Dulaimi's office Thursday and 29 arrested at Dualaimi's home Friday morning (Mekki Adnan al-Dulaimi was arrested at his father's home with the twenty-eight others). Robert H. Reid (AP) reports that, in the house arrests, "Iraqi security forces surrounded the house, a move the U.S. said was for the elder al-Dulaimi's personal safety. Al-Dulaimi complained that he was under virtual house arrest" and quotes the Sunni politician declaring, "I will wait until Saturday morning and if the ban of my family continues, then I will consider the government's measure as a house arrest." BBC notes that Adnan al-Dulaimi states that car with the bomb "was not in the compound" and quotes Crispin Thorold who contributes that the incident will likely "increase tensions between the main Sunni Arab political bloc and supporters of the Shia Prime Minister, Nouri Maliki." Gee, you think? And al-Dulaimi is thought to have organized the minister walk out in August (walking out of al-Maliki's cabinet). Think that doesn't matter? Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) reports today that there have been "17 ministries vacant for months." Rubin also notes the Thursday boycott in the Iraq Parliament over al-Maliki attempting to appoint ministers without input and to alter the Constitutional rules regarding the need for a quorum as well as the puzzler re: the arrests: "It is hard to understand why Mr. Dulaimi's guards might want to kill fellow Sunnis in the Awakening Council" and quotes an unnamed military official who declares "that it was impossible to rule out that an enemy of Mr. Dulaimi might have been trying to frame him." CNN reports "Slowing death rate in Iraq encourages Pentagon." Maybe that's why the Pentagon's been doing Multi-National Force's job. In the last few days, MNF has announced only one death. MNF's job is to announce the dead. The Defense Department puts names to them publicly after the families have been informed. Allen C. Roberts and John J. Tobiason deaths received no announcement from MNF.

Something that received lots of announcements was the mythic "Great Return." Michael Gordon and Stephen Farrell (New York Times) report: "As if to underscore Mr. Maliki's point, 375 Iraqi refugees arrived Thursday in a convoy of buses from Damascus, Syria, escorted by heavily armed policemen. After the lengthy journey, the tired Iraqis were ushered into the white marble affluence of the Mansour Melia Hotel in Baghdad to receive a promised government payout to people returning to the capital."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack left two people wounded and Hibhib mortar attack claimed 3 lives and left two people wounded while yesterday a car bombing in Al Shirqat claimed the lives of 4 police officer. Reuters notes a bomber in Dhuluwiya killed himself and 1 Iraqi police captin while wounded two more police officers and a mortar attack outside Kirkuk that left two children injured.

Okay, we're throwing in programming here. RadioNation with Laura Flanders is a new broadcast and features US House Rep and 2008 Democratic presidential contender Dennis Kucinch. Kucinich and not, as I wrongly stated earlier in the week, the legal panel. (Those wanting to hear the legal panel can go to the Flanders archives.) In addition, Australia's election will be covered (John Howard out, Kevin Rudd in), Sue Dinsdale and Ari Berman will talk about the Iowa primaries in terms of the illegal war, Parvez Sharma (director of the documentary film A Jihad for Love) and Rev. Billy of the Church of Stop Shopping explaining the "Christmas Shopocalypse." Laura Flanders' program airs Sundays from 1:00 pm to 2:00 pm EST over the airwaves on Air America Radio, on XM satellite radio and streams online. That's radio on Sunday. Tonight (Friday), PBS' Bill Moyers Journal begins airing their latest installment which will explore the Middle East and featuring Ron Sider and M.J. Rosenberg as guests with a report about Christians United for Israel. Remember that the program's website includes a blog and you can leave comments and questions there. In most markets, Bill Moyers Journal will be airing tonight; however, some markets have started their pledge drive and the show may be interrupted or rescheduled. In addition to checking your local TV listings, you can remember that Bill Moyers Journal shares with Democracy Now! the fact that it is online and it is watch, listen or read. Welcoming to all. And with the number of wounded returning from Iraq, you'd think more programs would elect to go with that option. That has happened but the Journal and DN! are accessible to all. Lastly, David Bacon's "What a Vote for Free Trade Means" (San Francisco Chronicle) details the realities that it's not just Iraq on which the shift in power in Congress (from Republican to Democratic control) hasn't produced the needed results. Bacon's not just one of the last reporters in the country covering the labor beat, he also takes news photographs that are actually art and you can see some of his photos addressing immigration by clicking here.

Turning to US politics. Tom Hayden has an article [Warning] at The Nation. What's the point of it? 527s aren't independent and let's not lie and pretend they are. Although he's realized that Barack Obama's New York Times chat was more revealing in transcript than write up, he's still creating false lines between Hillary Clinton and Obama that portray Obama in a flattering light. (For reality in the comparison, see Paul Krugman in this morning's New York Times via Truthout.) He places a lot of faith in MoveOn. We usually call them "WalkOn" here but, to their credit, they didn't back down even when condemned by some in the Senate. Maybe MoveOn has a spine? It's more than possible and, if so, good for them. But MoveOn appears in this sentence explaining where the peace movement can focus in the fall of 2008: "House and Senate races. It is perhaps here that groups like MoveOn and Progressive Democrats of America can have the greatest effect, by bolstering the numbers of antiwar senators and representatives who favor terminating the war in 2009. Think: Senator Al Franken."

Now Greens will be offended by the article and many Dems and many others and if that needs to be addressed, I'll carry it over to a column in a community newsletter. Let's instead focus (and this will go to a larger point) on one aspect of that. "Senator Al Franken" who apparently favors "terminating the war in 2009." Franken was pro-illegal war before it started, pro-illegal war while hosting his hideous radio show on Air America Radio and only recently came out against the illegal war. In that kind-of manner he's famous for (give five minutes in a speech to sobs over veterans care and then, having hidden behind that, do a quick line about how you oppose the illegal war, then move quickly on). What the hell is Al Franken doing in that column?

Al Franken DOES NOT CALL for an end to the illegal war in 2009. That's from his campaign staff who steered me to this page at Al Franken's website. "Immediately beginning the process of bringing the troops home. Our withdrawal should not be precipitous . . ." Click on the link to read in full (that link provided only because I'm friends with the person who steered me to it.) So that's wrong. Al Franken's remarks are no different than Hillary Clinton's -- whom Tom Hayden calls out (while glossing over Obama's flaws). So that's wrong. How wrong is it for Tom Hayden to ignore an ongoing race? Al Franken is not the nominee for the US Senate by the Democratic Party. He is someone running for the nomination. Jack Nelson-Pallymeyer is whom students on campuses are excited about in that state -- students wanting to end the illegal war. Nelson-Pallmeyer is calling for an end to the illegal war. The sort of end that Hayden himself favors. So the question here is if we don't support the candidates who believe as we do, what kind of people are we? I'm not calling Tom a hypocrite. I am saying he doesn't know the Minnesota race and, as someone who struggled in his original races (both the losing one and the first victory), I am surprised that he's calling a "win" in a primary that won't be 'closed' (short of other candidates dropping out*) until "The Tuesday of Destiny" (February 5, 2008). That same sort of declaration/awarding can be found in: "Voting for Kucinich, Richardson or Gravel is a legitimate choice but not a nominee." Your choice is legitimate, Kucinich, Richardson or Gravel supporters; however, get with the program. I remember damn well the negative circulars put out by Tunney's campaign. I'm guessing someone has forgotten those days. But in 1976, Hayden's opponent didn't think Hayden made for "a nominee." So it's really surprising to see someone who's been through it himself attempt to call an ongoing race. *Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer is not the only other person running for the nomination. I'm mentioning him because Minneapolis students are passionate on the need to elect him. Repeated trips to that state have revealed an enthusiasm for him that is not in place for Franken. He may or may not win the race. But there's really no reason for The Nation to be promoting an open race as if there's only one candidate.

And that's the problem with the article. It's most obvious with regards to the Senate race. But it's there in terms of the presidency. Here's a thought for the peace movement (Hayden is a part of the peace movement), how about we stop wasting our time on elections? How about we start using that time to instead talk about ending the illegal war? (There's a second aspect to that but it's a piece this Sunday at The Third Estate Sunday Review.) Tom Hayden honestly wants to end the illegal war. That's not a pose with him, it's not a con, he truly wants to end the illegal war and wants that deeper in his soul than many other people. But here's why all this election talk is seen as nonsense by many students in today's peace movement: It starts with "Vote for whomever but we're only covering the front runners." Then it becomes "Use your voice however you want but that's not really a worthy nominee." And now it's to the point that a state race, not a national one, is being called when the state won't be holding its primary until February 5, 2008. At what point does it end? Will it filter down to municipal races? And if state candidates who support everything that is in Hayden's latest book (Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer does) aren't even noted while their opponent is not only noted but is misrepresented in the article (in a favorable light), what does that really say about the state of the peace movement?

I'm not endorsing Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer or anyone (other than Cindy Sheehan) but it is troublesome that the author of 2001's School of Assassins: Guns, Greed and Globalization can't get a 'shout out' or a 'hey-hey' from the very people who believe in the same global issues. And, here's the thing to pay attention to, young people in that state are working very hard on his campaign. The same way Hayden worked on the campaigns of others long before he ran for office. They believe in Nelson-Pallmeyer and I'd love to hear the explanation from Hayden to them on how their candidate -- who truly wants to end the illegal war -- isn't worth noting in a magazine article? If older members of the peace movement want to be helpful, there are ways to be helpful. Telling people how to vote or ignoring their candidates isn't a way to be helpful and Tom Hayden knows many 'olders' hit the dirt in his day over this very issue. Hayden's 1976 run did make a difference. The same way, regardless of outcomes, other runs today will. Students don't need or want "voters' guides." They did want leadership and it hasn't been provided repeatedly which is why they've become their own leaders. In terms of others running in races right now . . . Hayden was a wonderful state assembly person and would have been a wonderful US senator (would still be a wonderful one). As a former candidate, he should grasp how harmful it is when you are the candidate speaking to the issues and others are actively working to highlight another candidate who is not addressing the issues.

In Yes! magazine, Aimee Allison and David Solnit address the things needed to build a stronger movement and shoring up Barack Obama doesn't take place once nor do they feel the need to predict primary winners. In an amazing article, the authors conclude, "The courage of young people in the military, on campuses and in the streets is showing us how to assert our people power. It's clear that more and more folks in the United States and around the world have the courage to resist. Can we find what lies at the root of the word courage-le coeur, or heart-to assert our power as communities, as movements, and as people to reverse the policies of empire and build a better world?" That really gets to the heart of what's needed in the peace movement today -- what's already there but needs to be amplified. Allison and Solnit are the authors of Army Of None -- a practical and inspiring book that addresses what's being done, what can be done and where we can all dream a little further.

Finally, returning to the topic of Dia al-Kawwaz (noted yesterday). Mohammed al Dulaimy, Jenan Hussein and Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) report, "Kawazz charged Friday that he'd been misled by Sadiq -- who first debunked his story -- in order to discredit him as a journalist." Sadiq is his brother-in-law Haider Sadiq. Someone lied to him -- that's not sarcasm. The Association to Defend Iraqi Journalist's rights' Ibrahim Saraj stated "Relatives confirmed the incident to me; Dhia confirmed it to me." He is conducting an investigation.

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Thursday and I'm staring late due to the roundtable for Gina and Krista's newsletter. Do you remember when the US tried to overthrow Hugo Chavez last time? He was returned to power only due to the strong support from the people. Now they're at it again. This is from Dave Lindorff's "News Not Fit to Print: US Coup Planned for Venezuela?:"

The New York Times had a news article about Venezuela in Thursday's edition, but it was about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez saying he would cut diplomatic ties with neighboring Colombia. There wasn't a word about a memo from a CIA operative in Caracas to CIA Director General Michael Hayden, uncovered yesterday, outlining a plan for interfering with a Venezuelan referendum set for Dec. 2, and laying out the steps for instigating and backing a coup.The plot, called "Operation Pliers," and laid out in the letter to Hayden by an undercover operative named Michael Steele, who reportedly works in the US Embassy as a "regional affairs officer," was intercepted by Venezuelan intelligence and released publicly on state TV yesterday.In the Nov. 20-dated letter, Steele refers to an $8 million US-funded in-country propaganda campaign against Chavez and the referendum, already being implemented, which is designed to institutionalize many of Chavez’s socialist reforms and to permit him to continue to run for president beyond his current two-term limit. He proposes trying to stall the referendum, which pro-Chavez forces are expected to win handily, and failing that, to then promote a campaign to refuse to accept the results. Steele further confirms that the agency is working with international news agencies in an effort to distort reports about the referendum and the reforms. (CNN had to apologize for a "mistake" which led to the words "Who killed him?" superimposed over a photo of Chavez broadcast on CNN's Spanish-language international broadcast in Venezuela. Was this a deliberate CIA-inspired black-op?)Among the tactics Steele recommends in his letter are:* Promoting street demonstrations and violent protests* Creating a climate of ungovernability* Provoking a general uprising* Working through the US military attaché at the embassy to coordinate with ex-military officers and former coup plotters against Chavez.Even more darkly, the letter calls for initiating "military actions" to support opposition mobilizations and strategic building occupations, involving US military bases in neighboring Curacao and Colombia to provide support, and even taking control of parts of Venezuela in the days after the referendum, while encouraging a "military rebellion" inside the Venezuelan National Guard.

I love the way you hear these people on MSM talking about Chavez as a "Bush hater" and acting surprised. Like they don't know what happened in 2002? More likely like they're paid to lie and act like they don't know.

Hugo Chavez is an elected leader and I'm naturally skeptical of them. So I'm not someone in love with Hugo (if you are, good for you, he seems like someone who tries to help the poor and there aren't many leaders like that). But when you think of all the faux left who have called for Hugo to be ousted in the last few years, labeled him a 'threat' and start coming across names like Simon Rosenberg and David Sirota, I think you know you're dealing with a lot of imperialists pretending to be grass-roots believers in democracy.

Hugo Chavez has repeatedly won elections. The fact that Rosenberg and Sirota obsess over him and desposing him demonstrates that they aren't progressive. Sirota, if you've forgotten, was also slamming Tina Richards and defending David Obey not all that long ago while telling us that the Democrats had a plan and they were going to end the war. Keep lying, faux lefty.

It's disgusting and when you start grasping the lies they tell on other issues, you should really be questioning their committment to a true Democratic Party. I have a feeling they will emerge shortly declaring themselves 'libertarian Democrats.' There's no such thing. It's DLC-lite though they try to package it as new. It basically means screw women, screw racial minorities, we'll lie to get in power. I believe that's how Sirota bragged about tricking voters in an election, isn't it?

If we had a real left in power at alternative media, the likes of Sirota, Rosenberg and The Daily Toliet Scrubber would be called out and we'd see people going out of their way to say, "That's them. There's a huge line between them and us." Like if Katrina vanden Heuvel had any beliefs (she obviously doesn't give a damn about ending the illegal war), she'd be all over this. Supposedly she believes in government programs but she's happy to promote all three and they don't believe in government. They cover it, they sugar coat it but when you toss in "libertarian" that's what it's all about. Not only does she not call it out, she encoruages it.

She's just one more 'faux' lefty wanting to be a player at any costs. Not a player to make a difference, just a player to be 'somebody.' And that's why she'll never be anything. She can't stand up for anything. So she falls for everything -- gladly.

Dave Lindorff does his best to tell the truth in everything he writes. Make a point to check out the link (he also does a funny thing in the link with a Washington Post column).

That's going to be it tonight. I type slow and I started late. Tomorrow night (late), I'd like to cover the latest Law and Disorder and also talk some about Naomi Wolf in relation to a coward on the left who can't call out what's happening the way Wolf does but can slam others who do.

Thursday, November 29, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, cholera is back in the news, some have hopes for Kevin Rudd but some do not, the US military announces a death, and more.

On November 15th Canada's Supreme Court announced they would not hear the appeals of US war resisters Following the refusal of the Canadian Supreme Cour to hear the appeals of US war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey.

Susan SarandonComments on U.S. WarResisters in CanadaJanuary 27, 2007Washington, D.C.

Geoffrey Millard: Do you think it's wise for US service members to take the option to go to Canada?

Susan Sarandon: I think if you conscience tells you that you don't want to fight, that this is an unjust war, there's a long tradition of refusing and resisting to fight and I think that really I just wish that there was more press about that as an alternative because I've run into so many people who -- who are in the position now and don't know what will happen if they refuse who are very frightened either to not go back or to go for the first time. On the train coming up here I spoke to a woman whose twenty-year-old brother was in ROTC he got called up and he's getting two weeks of training in Tacoma and being deployed in the 'surge' and he is just stunned. He married his girlfriend this weekend, from high school. He doesn't know what's going on and I said, 'Well maybe he shouldn't go?' She said, "Oh, he said he can't do that because he'd be thrown in prison and prison's terrible and blah, blah, blah

Geoffrey Millard: If you could say one thing to soldiers going to Canada what would it be?

Susan Sarandon: I would say, "God bless you. And, you know, I admire your courage and know that there are people here who -- who see this as an honorable thing and that I hope that you can reach out and make it known to other people who have these kinds of doubts and convictions to have the courage of their convictions and to refuse.

Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis and NDP Immigration critic Olivia Chow butted heads over whether the committee should jump straight to the war resister issue, as Ms. Chow wanted, or whether the committee should first finish the work it started during the last session. Also, while Ms. Chow originally asked that the study focus on U.S. war resisters, specifically the two deserters facing extradition back to the United States, Mr. Karygiannis asked to open up the issue to deserting soldiers from other countries. After much debate, the committee agreed to look at Iraq war resisters and Iraqi refugees on Dec. 6 and 11. Citizenship and Immigration Canada officials are also slated to testify about undocumented workers on Dec. 13, while members spent four hours drafting a report on the loss of Canadian citizenship yesterday and will continue their work today and tomorrow.

Support actual war resisters in Canada by sending them expense money. From my friend Ryan (I gave him and his wife money to get to Canada over two years ago):

In light of the recent Supreme Court denial in Canada, I (Ryan Johnson), My wife (Jen Johnson) and Brandon Hughey need help raising funds to travel to Ottawa to attend hearings before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, where War Resisters will be giving Testimony to the committee. At these hearings the committee will be deciding on whether or not to make a provision to allow war resisters to stay in Canada. This is one of our last chances to be able to continue living in Canada. We will be leaving December 7th because the hearings are December 11th, 2007 so we need to act fast. They may try to send guys back soon and we need to have a strong War Resister Presence. We appreciate all of the support and Want to thank all of you who can help.

Checks/money orders can be sent for Ryan, Jen and Brandon to:312 Tower RdNelson, BC V1L3K6

If you are in Canada, you can utilize the contact info at War Resisters Support Campaign to let members of the Canadian Parliament know you support legislation allowing war resisters to stay in Canada. If you are in the United States (or elsewhere), you can utilize the contact info and/or forum at Courage to Resist. Public outcry didn't stop the illegal war from starting and public opposition has yet to end it. War resisters in Canada who have gone public are putting a great deal on the line. Use the links to show your support for them.

The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers. In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear. Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

In Australia, many hopes were raised with the Saturday election of Kevin Rudd to the post of Prime Minister. Rudd's call for pulling Australian combat troops out of Iraq was seen as "troops out of Iraq." Greg Barns (Seattle Post-Intelligencer) informed yesterday that "one of the first acts of Rudd's government will be to immediately withdraw the 550 Australian combat troops still in Iraq -- something that will no doubt irk in Bush." Less than a week since the election and already Australia's ABC reports that the supposed independent and elected ruler of Australia won't make a move without a nod from the US according to Robert McCallum (the US ambassador in Australia): "Mr McCallum says Mr Rudd has promised to speak to the United States before making any changes in Iraq." Meanwhile Brendan Nelson's whose 'rising star' status should have crashed and burned over his public statements regarding the late Jake Kovco is now the leader of the Liberal party -- the party John Howard, previous prime minister, hails from. Australia's Herald Sun reports Nelson is talking of Australia's 'responsibility' to the US and, as an after-thought, Iraq (link also offers video and Nelson's hair appears to have been set in homage to SNL's Coneheads). "The gloves are off now," the Herald Sun reports Rudd stating and notes he has announced his cabinet. How long did it take al-Maliki to announce his cabinet? Back to Rudd, Michael Fullilove (Los Angeles Times) expresses hope, "The results of the Australian election last weekend, however, may give pause to some in Washington: A social conservative, once described by President Bush as a 'man of steel,' was thrown out of office (and his own parliamentary seat) by a former diplomat who speaks Mandarin. On such issues as climate change and the war on terror, ousted Prime Minister John Howard was Bush's most faithful international supporter. After the inglorious departures of Britain's Tony Blair and Spain's Jose Maria Aznar, Bush and Howard were the last men standing of the Western leaders who invaded Iraq. Now Howard too is gone. It's as if the Sundance Kid charged alone into the rifles of the Bolivian army, leaving Butch Cassidy fiddling with his six-shooter."

As if that image of the US government isn't bad enough, AP reports that the US State Department's John Bellinger III says the US needs 'clarification' on the Geneva Conventions (try remedial lessons in it) and claims that Bilal Hussein can be imprisoned (19 months and counting) because "his understanding was that American forces were operating under an international mandate that allows for the detention of people who might pose a security threat" but, as the AP points out, "The Geneva Conventions contain specific references to the protection of journalists operating in war zones, including that they be treated as civilians unless they take part in hostilities." Bilal is the AP photographer -- Pulitzer Prize winning photographer who has been held since April 12, 2006. Free Bilal is a resource where you can find out more and sign a petition in support of him. As Ruth noted earlier this week, Bilal was the topic on NPR's All Things Considered Monday as Associated Press CEO and president Tom Curley spoke with Robert Siegel. Curley explained that they still didn't know what the charges would be but were told they might find out later this week. Curley reviewed how the AP's own investigation found nothing trouble. Not stated but it should be noted, the US has tried this in the press before and their charges have fallen apart under scrutiny. Siegel asked if Bilal was basically being punished for doing his job and Curley replied, "We can't find any other reason." Daryl Lang (Photo District News) reports the US military announced today that they will "present evidence against" Bilal on December 9th. The 'trial' would take place in an Iraqi 'court.' Curley has [PDF format] written a letter to puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki which opens with: "I write to ask your help in assuring that justice is done in the case of Bilal Hussein, an Iraqi citizen and photographer for The Associated press who has been detained by the United States military since April 12, 2006. They say they suspect him of aiding terrorists. U.S. military officials have made many accusations against Mr. Hussein, although they have provided no evidence to support them. AP has conducted its own investigation of every specific allegation and has found them all to be either not credible or absolutely false. We believe the real reason for Mr. Hussein's detention and incarceration for 19 months without charges is that he produced images of conflict in Anbar Province which the military did not want the citizens of Iraq and the United States to see." In addition, Joe Strupp (Editor & Publisher) reports that "MIlitary Reporters and Editors became the latest group Wednesday to weigh in on the controversy regarding Associated Press Photographer Bilal Hussein, who is facing unspecified terrorist charges in Iraq." The letter opens with: "It could happen, we fear, to any journalist covering the war in Iraq. A soldier confiscates your notes, cameras and gear, and takes you into custody. Once jailed you have no rights -- not to remain silent, to call a lawyer or see a judge. That was the fate of Bilal Hussein, an Associated Press photographer who was part of a team that wona Pulitzer Prize in 2005. He has been jailed for 19 months by the U.S. military. . . . We at Military Reporters & Editors wonder how this incident has been allowed to go on for so long. We also wonder if it could happen to other Iraqi journalists who have risked their lives to tell American and the world about life in Iraq. . . . Bilal Hussein's imprisonment is contrary to every notion of justice, fair play and the U.S. Constitution, which every member of America's military swears to uphold and defend." AP's page on Bilal is here.

While the US tries to railroad Bilal, it also tries to force through a permanent occupation of Iraq. Bully Boy and his puppet think they can by-pass the Iraqi parliament. From Monday's snapshot: "(Question: Who ratifies treaties in the United States? The Congress. One more aspect of 'democracy' that never got exported to Iraq.)" Today, Bruce Ackerman (Los Angeles Times) reminds Americans that "the Constitution requires congressional approval before the nation can commit itself to the sweeping political, economic and military relationship contemplated by the 'declaration of principles' signed by Bush and Maliki to kick off the negotiations. U.S. legislative approval can come in two forms: Either two-thirds of the Senate can vote for a treaty under Article II of the Constitution, or a simple majority of both houses can authorize the agreement under Article I. But there is no constitutional provision or precedent authorizing this new form of Bush unilateralism."

In this morning's papers, Cara Buckley (New York Times) is one of the few to report from Iraq. Buckley notes that the Wednesday bused and bought refugees from Syria that came back to Iraq in "20 busloads" with a "government spokesman" hailing the return of 800 while the city coucil says it was more like 200 and cites Dana Graber Ladek (International Organization for Migration) explaining that the those returning in the trickle "have discovered squatters living in their homes". Buckley also notes the cholera outbrak ("with 101 new cases reported in recent weeks") and notes issues of sewage. CNN reports that UNICEF is warning there may be "a larger outbreak" of the disease in Iraq and quotes UNICEF's Claire Hajaj explaining, "While national caseloads are declining, we are increasingly concerned about a possible outbreak in Baghdad. The capital accounts for 70 percent all new cases and is now up to 101 cases, the vast majority reported in the past three weeks."

In other dangers on the ground in illegal war . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing this morning which left six people wounded, another that left five wounded, a Baquba mortar attack on a police station that left two police officers wounded, an Al-Muqdadiyah mortar attack that wounded two, an Al-Salam mortar attack that claimed 12 lives and left twenty-five wounded, a Baquba roadside bombing that left two wounded and a roadside bombing outside Bamo village which claimed the lives of 2 Iraqis ("one officer and a soldier"). And in what may or may not be an attempted attack on an official. Reuters reports 2 car bombs were found ("and detonated") "in the Baghdad office complex of the leader of the country's main Sunni Arab bloc" -- Adnan al-Dulaimi. In addition, Reuters reports two Baghdad roadside bombings near mini-buses that left eleven people injured and a Mosul car bombing that left two police officers wounded. CNN notes that the US military announced today that "a team of U.S. Apache helicopters fired 30 mm cannon and Hellfire missiles at a house from which insurgents attacked a coalition convoy on Tuesday. Three insurgnets were killed". They hope three 'insurgents' were killed. The actual news it the US military fired on a home and killed three. At this point the three dead are not known to have been anything other than civiliains.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baquba attack on Hamid Ibrahim ("the head of Hibhib police) that wounded two of his bodyguards and, in another attack targeting officials, the son of Sheikh Dhamim Al-Ajeel was shot dead in Salahuddin and, in another attack targeting officials, Amar Mohammed Al-Hamadani ("Hawijah district mayor"), was injured 1 of his bodyguards killed in an attack in Hawijah. Reuters notes that yesterday "the mayor of a district in central Tikrit" was shot dead and (also yesterday) "Five bodyguards who work for Iraq's acting minister for tourism and antiquities were wounded when Iraqi soldiers opened fire on their convoy in western Baghdad on Wednesday, the ministry said. The minister was not in the convoy and the incident was under investigation."

Today the US military announced: "Small-arms fire killed one Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier in a western section of the Iraqi capital Nov. 28."

Turning to US politics, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) notes, "Former President Bill Clinton is under scrutiny for claiming he opposed the Iraq war 'from the beginning.' Clinton made the claim Tuesday while campaigning for his wife Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in Iowa. But a look at Clinton's public statements from 2002-on reveal he never unequivocally opposed the war and at times voiced nuanced approval. In March 2003, Clinton criticized France for opposing the invasion and defended British Prime Minister Tony Blair for taking part. Meanwhile a former senior administration official is now claiming White House officials personally briefed Clinton in the lead-up to war and that Clinton voiced his support. The official, Hillary Mann Leverett is the former White House director of Persian Gulf affairs. She says she was 'shocked' and 'astonished' at Clinton's claim to oppose the war. Leverett says former administration official Elliot Abrams emerged from one pre-war meeting 'glowing' after Clinton promised he would publicly support an Iraq invasion." While it is hard to believe anyone would ever describe Elliot Abrams as "glowing," Tom Baldwin (Times of London) quotes Bill Clinton's spokesperson Jay Carson stating, "As he said before the war and many times since, President Clinton disagreed with taking the country to war without allowing the weapons inspectors to finish their jobs."

Turning to a topic noted in Monday and Tuesday's snapshot. Dia al-Kawwaz stated that 11 of his relatives had been murdered by Shi'ites on Sunday and that during a wake Tuesday, there was another attack. Late yesterday, his mother and other family members appeared on a US funded Iraqi channel to maintain that was not true. Reports Without Borders quickly issued a statement. Too quickly, some might argue since we've had one set of charges (from Dia al-Kawwaz) and another set of charges (from his mother and others) with no investigation. Dia al-Kawwaz may very well be sick enough to state make up the death of 11 members of his family. On the other hand, he may have made up nothing. If the latter is true, 11 members of his family may have been killed or he may have been told 11 members died as some sort of a cruel trick. Since nothing more is known at this point then he says ___ and others say ___, since nothing's been verified, maybe it's a bit early to beat him up? Maybe Reporters Without Borders should have stuck with their original call for an investigation into the events because that's the only way what did or did not happen -- and how -- will be known.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Hump-day, hump-day. Two days to the weekend. And it feels like it's never going to get here! Seriously.

Back when they were taking pledges at WBAI, I wrote about Law and Disorder doing a live interview that wouldn't be up at the website. (My boss kept hollering for me to come into his office and listen, if you need your memory jogged.) Michal Ratner and Michael Smith and Heidi Boghosian spoke with Naomi Wolf and it was a really great interview. Wolf was on Democracy Now! today:

AMY GOODMAN: Number nine and number ten of your steps toward fascism: restrict the press; cast criticism as espionage, dissent as treason. Subvert the rule of law is eleven. What is the patriot's task, where you conclude?NAOMI WOLF: Well, the patriot's task is, first, wake up. I mean, all around the world, democracy activists who are familiar with these same ten steps are sort of waving their arms at us, going, "No! You know, recognize this." You don't make it easier for the President to declare martial law, as we just did with the 2007 Defense Authorization Act. You don't make it easier for the President to lock up political opponents in a cell or strip people of habeas corpus. No, you don’t make it easier for the President to have a paramilitary force like Blackwater, composed of hand-selected torturers and murderers from countries like Chile and Nigeria and El Salvador, where they're trained to torture their own civilians. You know, you don't set them loose in Illinois and Southern California and North Carolina. No! Bad idea! So, first, you wake up. You see the blueprint.AMY GOODMAN: We have ten seconds.NAOMI WOLF: Finally, we have to -- we started the americanfreedomcampaign.org. It's a democracy movement to restore the rule of law. We're calling for lawyers across the country and citizens to call for hearings, special prosecutor, identify the crimes, impeach and prosecute, and save the country.AMY GOODMAN: Naomi Wolf, I want to thank you for being with us. Do you think Democratic candidates are raising these issues, for president?NAOMI WOLF: Not enough. This is a transpartisan issue, and we all need to push them, hold their feet to the fire across the board.AMY GOODMAN: Naomi Wolf's book is The End of America. Thank you for being with us.

There's enough in the interview (not just the excerpt) for about 20 nominees for "Truest statement of the week" at Third. If we only do one (I think C.I.'s laid it out like no other in "Operation Happy Talk rolls into the shore" today) "Truest" this week and it's not Wolf, it'll just be because she provided too much and cancelled herself out.

This is a really important topic and we really need to be paying attention. I think Ava and C.I. are pairing it up with something this weekend for their TV commentary because they pointed out Sunday we still hadn't discussed Wolf's new book at Third. That's not an insult to Wolf it's just everyone's like, "Book discussion? Do you not remember the last one!" :D I mean we worked hours and hours on that and then people were typing up Ava and C.I.'s notes and then came the hours of debate about whether we posted the discussion or not. Finally Dona and C.I. go that we are making the exact same points over and over and not arriving at any conclusion so they said, "Let's all take a nap and sleep on it." I loved that nap! Seriously. But even after we didn't know what to do and finally decided to shelve it until one of the co-authors was telling the press that there was this "one group" that wouldn't even read the book. When Jim saw that, you knew it was going up. "1 Book, 10 Minutes" might be the last book discussion until next year.

But we all love Wolf's book and let me get a link for it. The End of America: Letters of Warning to a Young Patriot is the title of the book and there's a link to it. It reminds me a lot of some of the stuff Daniel Ellsberg has been talking about too. And of course the things that the Michaels, Heidi and Dalia Hashad talk about each week.

She made a really good point in another interview (maybe with the Michaels and Heidi) about how the Congress keeps trying to 'work' with Bully Boy and how in the White House it's like, "We're not going to work with you." And how that's one of the stages in a closing society. It's all mapped out in the book.

Oh, a reader named Nancy wrote and she only writes every few months but when she does, I usually talk about what she wrote to friends. She asks the most interesting questions. But I'll talk about her e-mail today here because it's about books and reading. She said she understood how work and college means I'm way behind in my non-school reading (always!) but her question was how come I liked to read? She's got two small kids and she reads to them but she wonders if I can remember anything from my childhood?

Both of my parents read and read all the time when I was growing up. That was the newspapers, magazines and books. I'm the second youngest of eight kids and I remember most of my brothers and sisters reading a lot too (but some just would read magazines). I also remember that I didn't have to have "reading time." That started before I was born and it was an assigned time. But Ma always had snacks. Everybody would pile into the living room and read for at least an hour on Sundays. It wasn't assigned by the time I was old enough to read but we still all went in there. The TV would be off (and stay off) and Ma would have chips and pretzels and stuff like that in bowls and we'd all choose our spots and just read whatever.

Because Nancy's really worried about this (making sure her kids will want to read when they get older), I asked Ma about it. She told me it was assigned for the first three kids but by the time the fourth was old enough to read it was "established" and all the rest of us just fell into the pattern. She said she and Dad went back and forth trying to figure out if "assigning" an hour would be good or make reading feel like punishment? Finally, she decided that if there were snacks it would be less like punishment. It never felt like punishment to me and she said for me to tell Nancy that if it's just going to be the two "snacks for reading" will probably work. Just set out some snacks and grab a book. When the kids want to have some of the snacks, explain those are reading snacks. Right now, Ma said Nancy could then ask them to pick a book that Nancy would read to them but they'd get it in their minds that this was something to do. She said if it was a bigger family, start with the oldest and when they do it, the others will follow them.

Goodman's got a new column called "Have They No Shame?" and it's about how the Democrats picked Ricardo Sanchez, at the helm of Abu Ghraib and an endorser of torture, to deliver their radio address to the nation last weekend:

This is not about politics. This is about the moral compass of the nation. The Democrats may be celebrating a retired general who has turned on his commander in chief. But the public should take pause.The Democrats had a chance to draw a line in the sand, to absolutely require Mukasey to denounce waterboarding before his elevation to attorney general. Now they have chosen as their spokesman a discredited general, linked to the most egregious abuses in Iraq. The Bush administration passed Sanchez over for a promotion, worried about reliving the Abu Ghraib scandal during the 2006 election year. Now it's the Democrats who have resuscitated him. Have they no shame?

In 2003, the Liberal government upheld international law and refused to join the war in Iraq.Prime Minister Jean ChretienIraq war debate -- March 17, 2003

Chretien: If military action proceeds without a new resultion of the [United Nations] Security Council, Canada will not participate.

[Applause. Standing ovation.]

Since 2004, dozens of U.S. soldiers have left the military and come to Canada.

These soldiers have come to Canada because they oppose the war in Iraq.

They need a provision from the Canadian government to let them stay.

US War Resister Justin Colby: My name is Justin Colby. I was a specialist in the United States Army. I served for three years. I spent one year in Ar Ramadi, Iraq. I joined the army after 9-11 and I left the army after my year in Iraq, before my unit was going to go back. And I left because Iraq never attacked the United States and the things that we did there led me to believe that we weren't defending our country.

On November 15th, 2007, the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of U.S. war resisters.

As a result, U.S. war resisters living in Canada face deportation back to the U.S.

If deported, they face imprisonmnet, or even deployment back to Iraq.

US War Resister Kimberly Rivera: I'm Kimbely Rivera. I served three months in Iraq and I'm here with my family.

A 2007 poll found that 64.6% of Ontario voters and 71% of Liberal voters want U.S. war resisters to stay in Canada.

US War Resister Phil McDowell: My name is Phil McDowell. I'm a former sergeant in the United States Army. I joined the army after September the 11th. I served a one-year tour in Iraq from 2004 to 2005. During my tour I realized that the war was unjust and illegal and the reasons for the invasion were lies. After completing my contractual agreement with the army, I was called back into service for another fifteen-month tour. At that time, I refused to deploy, moved to Canada because I believed I'd be able to stay here. We're asking Liberals to support a provision that would allow Iraq War Resisters to remain in Canada.

U.S. war resisters need the support of the Liberal Party to live in Canada.

Support actual war resisters in Canada by sending them expense money. From my friend Ryan (I gave him and his wife money to get to Canada over two years ago):

In light of the recent Supreme Court denial in Canada, I (Ryan Johnson), My wife (Jen Johnson) and Brandon Hughey need help raising funds to travel to Ottawa to attend hearings before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, where War Resisters will be giving Testimony to the committee. At these hearings the committee will be deciding on whether or not to make a provision to allow war resisters to stay in Canada. This is one of our last chances to be able to continue living in Canada. We will be leaving December 7th because the hearings are December 11th, 2007 so we need to act fast. They may try to send guys back soon and we need to have a strong War Resister Presence. We appreciate all of the support and Want to thank all of you who can help.

Checks/money orders can be sent for Ryan, Jen and Brandon to:312 Tower RdNelson, BC V1L3K6

L-girl (We move to canada) blogs, "I know I've been belabouring the war and war resisters lately, but as I've said elsewhere, this blog reflects what's on my mind. I'm so disgusted, enraged, heartsick, horrified -- got any words? -- at what's going on in Iraq, at how veterans are being treated in the US, at how ordinary citizens are being treated in the US. Wmtc is a chance to vent that, and maybe bring some items to your attention that you haven't seen." And who wouldn't be horrified? The illegal war started -- over international opposition -- and continues. War resisters who have taken a stand and said "no" need support. As Guy Charron (WSWS) observes, "The war has, moreover, resulted in untold violence and countless atrocities. According to studies by reputable agencies, the war and the accompanying destruction of Iraq society have caused the death of over one million Iraqis and the flight of millions of people from their homes and Iraq altogether. If the Canadian government intervened in the Hinzman and Hughey cases to prevent their raising the illegality of the war, it wasn't just to save the Bush administration from embarrassment. Ottawa feared Canada would become a haven for 'war resisters' and a pole of resistance to the war. Given a different decision on Hinzman's and Hughey's refugee claim, thousands more might well have joined them."

If you are in Canada, you can utilize the contact info at War Resisters Support Campaign to let members of the Canadian Parliament know you support legislation allowing war resisters to stay in Canada. If you are in the United States (or elsewhere), you can utilize the contact info and/or forum at Courage to Resist. Public outcry didn't stop the illegal war from starting and public opposition has yet to end it. War resisters in Canada who have gone public are putting a great deal on the line. Use the links to show your support for them.

The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers. In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear. Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

IVAW is attempting to get the truth out. The need for that is demonstrated right now by a new poll by the Pew Research Center which illustrates just how successful Operation Happy Talk can still be (especially when so few bother to counter it). Demetri Sevastopulo (Financial Times of London via MSNBC) surveys the polls results and finds a shift in Pew's figures from February -- then 30 percent of Americans surveyed said the illegal war was going well and now 47 percent say it is while 53 percent surveyed in February said bring the troops home and now that number is 54 percent. Eric Boehlert (Media Matters) examines Nightline (US' ABC network) and finds "that Nightline's interest in covering the war . . . waned. The program certainly was not alone. Most television news outlets, and the networks, in particular, have drastically cut back on the amount of airtime they now give to the war. Sometimes it appears as though the war doesn't even exist." And that's big media -- little media's no better. If you're a magazine or broadcast program -- big or small -- you should probably doing a self-check right about now because very few hands are clean and this latest poll is a reflection of what passes for coverage.

Did someone say coverage? The New York Times runs an important story on Iraq. On the front page? Stop, we're all laughing. A6 or A7? It didn't even make the news section. Richard Perez-Pena's report is entitled "Grim View of Iraq Dangers in Survey of Journalists" and runs on C5 (the business section, page five). Perez-Pena is summarizing a poll of "American journalists in Iraq" by the Project for Excellence in Journalism with most answering the survey "in October" -- considered 'less deadly'. Perez-Pena informs: "In a newly released survey, American journalists in Iraq give harrowing accounts of their work, with the great majority saying that colleagues have been kidnapped or killed and that most parts of Baghdad are too dangerous for them to visit." That was October. Where in your news coverage have you seen that indicated? What outlet? PEJ notes that they surveyed "111 journalists from 29 news organizations reporting from Iraq."

After four years of war in Iraq, the journalists reporting from that country give their coverage a mixed but generally positive assessment, but they believe they have done a better job of covering the American military and the insurgency than they have the lives of ordinary Iraqis. And they do not believe the coverage of Iraq over time has been too negative. If anything, many believes the situation over the course of the war has been worse than the American public has perceived, according to a new survey of journalists covering the war from Iraq.

The report quotes a bureau chief stating, "Welcome to the new world of journalism, boys and girls. This is where we lost our innocence. Security teams, body armor and armored cars will forever now be pushed in between journalism and stories." They praise the embedding (get in bed with the US military) program and self-report that theyve done an "excellent" or "good" job reporting on the US military (82%). I'll bite me tongue and move on. No, actually, I won't. The New York Times is notorious among the enlisted in Iraq for blowing them off -- it's a complaint that's registered every year of the illegal war. So it's interesting to turn to page 16 of the study and see that PEJ has blown the enlisted off as well. That's really embarrassing and goes to why the coverage today sucks so bad. I'm not talking about "embedding," I am talking about journalists talking with average soldiers and anyone who covered a war zone in the past will tell you that. But PEJ also doesn't feel they are important or sources. They asked the journalists to rank their access to a group of "key sources" and there are eight listed:

1) Iraqi civilians2) Other international diplomats/officials3) Iraqi government officials4) High ranking American military officers5) American diplomats/officials6) Iraqi sectarian leaders7) Western private contractors8) Iraqi terrorists/insurgents

The only military on the list are "High ranking American military officers" -- the ones the press already takes dictation from. Where are the enlisted? And how could PEJ have done a survey and not noticed that obvious flaw? 85% of the respondents have been embedded and of those who have 35% state that they were required to ask permission (from brass) "to interview soldiers." Obviously, it's far more difficult to speak to the enlisted than to a military p.r. flack with what's really an honorary title -- but don't those honorary titles look good in print. Of this embedded segment, 33% reply "yes" to the question of "Does the U.S. Military screen out reporters whose coverage of the war has been critical in the past?"

The journalists give themselves low marks (62% rated this area "fair to poor") on covering "the lives of ordinary Iraqis." It would be interesting to see a survey on earlier periods, especially on the issue of average Iraqis since in the Times' 'glory' days of Dexy and Burnsie, women didn't appear to exist in Iraq. (Sabrina Tavernise and other reporters that followed allowed Times readers to know that women did live in Iraq.) The survey finds -- remember this, "Six out of ten (63%) of the journalists surveyed say that Iraqi staffers do all or most of the street reporting outside the Green Zone."

In other findings, 62 percent say that their "editors back home" have lost interest in reports of day-to-day violence (no kidding) and the only significant increases have been in reports on contractors (79%) and "U.S. military strategy" (67%). The respondents rated the "Impact on Iraqi civilians" as the most under reported (40%) while the respondents rated "U.S. Military strategy" as the most over reported (29%).

Staying on Iraq but flashing back to the days of Judith Miller at the New York Times -- does anyone remember how Miller and Warren Hoge launched their grudge f--k against the United Nations in story after story? Miller's no longer with the paper and Hoge is on the down low. So Alan Feuer grabs duty and apparently does so without any editorial assistance which would explain how the world is learning of Texan "Farah Fawcett" for the first time. It's two r's: Farrah Fawcett. Having never heard of Farrah Fawcett, it's not all that surprising that Feuer hasn't heard of other things -- like the law. Oscar S. Wyatt Jr. received a sentence of one year and one day in prison. For what? Feuer tells you he "broke the rules of the United Nations program" -- no, he broke the law. Not a rule, a law. He bribed. He broke the law. The UN -- Miller and Hoge told you -- was the root of all corruption. Wyatt admitted his guilt and it's buried in the paper. "Act of kindess" and "he saved my life." Remember to use those two phrases when writing a judge about sentencing. They moved Wyatt's judge enough to show the felon mercy. (Fawcett was among those writing the judge asking for mercy -- for those wondering how she comes into the story.)

Not a lot of mercy in Iraq. Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) notes, "For the second day in a row, U.S. soldiers on Tuesday killed Iraqi civilians when they fired on a vehicle that they thought was a threat, the U.S. military said." Damien Cave (New York Times) offers, "The shootings by soldiers appear to receive less attention from Iraqi officials because, unlike contractors, whose legal situation remains murky, American soldiers are subject to military laws." They also receive less attention because they're rarely reported and when they are reported, there's an effort to explain them away -- even when it's the case of Iraqi children and women being shot in their own homes. Of the US military's apologies, Fadel quotes Saad Abdul Wahid asking, "Is sorry enough to bring back our friends to life? They keep making their mistakes day by day and we are paying too much." Meanwhile an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy Newspapers shared this event at Inside Iraq on Tuesday, "Yesterday noon, an American squad from the United State Army (about ten to twelve) broke in Al-Mansour preparatory school for one reason or another. We don't have the right to ask them why they came to the school. The soldiers spread in different spots of the school walking towards the back yard which is used as a soccer field. Most of the students were in their classes when the squad came, but still there were many students in the yard who were terrified to see the American soldiers with their guns. One of the students was upset to see the soldiers and he threw a stone and hit one of them. Three soldiers surrounded him kicking him with their boots for some minutes on different parts of his body."

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "4 bodyguards of state minister for tribal affairs were wounded" in a clash with the Iraqi military in Baghdad while Muhaned Mekhlif was shot dead "in Al Hawija west of Kirkuk." Reuters notes that 4 people were shot dead by Iraqi soldiers because they were 'suspected insurgents' (or that's what the Iraqi Defence Ministry states) and that 27 people were arrested. The US military announced: "A female suicide bomber detonated an explosive laden suicide-vest, wounding seven U.S. Soldiers and five Iraqi citizens in Baqubah, Nov. 27."

Today the UNHCR released a brief report on the returning refugees. Someone get a copy to CBS and AP who flat out lie ("More Iraqi refugees, heartened by reports of the lull in violence in Baghdad, were beginning to return"). Though Damien Cave has reported on the refugees being bussed in bought, CBS and AP play dumb there as well. (It is playing, right?) Reality from the UNHCR: approximately 800 left Syria for Baghdad on approximately 15 buses provided by the central (puppet) government in Iraq (no word on how much they were paid to return) and -- pay attention CBS and AP -- "most said they were going back to Iraq because they had run out of money and could no longer afford to stay in Syria, which is hosting more than 1.4 million Iraqi refugees." The UNHCR's figures find that the tiny trickle of returnees is composed of 14% returning due to the 'safety' myths and 70% returning "because of tougher visa regulations and because they are not allowed to work and can no longer afford to stay in Syria." Get it yet?

Naomi Wolf: . . . they used the fake yellow-cake documents to argue that Iraq was trying to secure yellow-cake uranium and remember the famous soundbye, 'We can't wait for the smoking gun to come in the form of a mushroom cloud' to drive us into an illegal war with a nation we were not at war with.

Amy Goodman: You also talk about the language like the Department of Homeland Security.

Naomi Wolf: That is where I, as a social critic and student of language, get really scared. It's scary enough to see these ten steps but what is terrifying to me personally is how many actual phrases are being recycle and tactics. Homland security [the German phrase] "heimat" became popularized by the National Socialists [NAZIs]. Goebbels developed the practice of embedding journalists. Leni Reifenstahl was embedded for instance in Poland.

Amy Goodman: She's the famous German film maker.

Naomi Wolf: I mean if you look at the sequence of Hitler descending in an airplane and in Leni Reifenstahl's famous Triumph of the Will and being greeted by the uniformly armed para-military surrounding their leader and he's saying, 'Help us accomplish our mission' and then you look at other famous images from this administration --

Amy Goodman: Like George Bush on "Mission Accomplished."

Naomi Wolf: Accomplished." Exactly. You look at how Hitler said 'We have to invade Czecholslavakia, they're a staging ground for terrorists and they're abusing their ethnic minorities' -- again, a country that we're not at war with; when the WMD charge vanished, the White House said we have to invade Iraq 'staging ground for terrorists and they're abusing their ethnic minorities' -- on and on and on.

In her latest column (changing the topic), Goodman wonders about the shame factor involved in the Democratic Party using torture czar Ricardo Sanchez to deliver their radio address last Saturday. This Sunday on RadioNation with Laura Flanders, the program broadcasts a June discussion on the Constitution and national security under Bully Boy featuring Slate's Dahlia Lithwick, John Nichols and David Cole.

Followers

About Me

I'm Michael, Mike to my friends. College student working his way through. I'm also Irish-American and The New York Times can kiss my Irish ass. And check out Trina's Kitchen on my links, that's my mother's site.